Sequester: President should use scalpel, not cleaver

U-T San Diego Editorial Board

The sequester scare has provided one more example that we have a president who’s more interested in politics than leadership. Barack Obama’s attempts to terrify the public with worst-case scenarios if the $3.6 trillion federal budget was cut by 2.3 percent fell flat, because most people realized that the sky won’t fall – if the cuts are made in a responsible way, instead of with a cleaver.

It’s long past time for the president to get out the scalpel. Among the obvious first steps are a pay and hiring freeze. (Incredibly, the White House plans to raise the salary of hundreds of thousands of federal employees later this year, even as it warns of mass furloughs.) Another good idea is delaying pending capital projects or killing dumb ones (bye, bye, bullet train). Another is finally consolidating the many overlapping government agencies. Another is finally changing the formulas that exaggerate annual inflation when paying some entitlement benefits.

But if the White House continues to see the sequester as a political weapon, the pain will be far greater than it needs to be. When it was set up in 2011 – at the White House’s request – it included disproportionate cuts in defense spending. The San Diego Regional Economic Development Corp. warns 25,000 local workers could be affected as a result. These workers shouldn’t be collateral damage of Obama’s manipulative political strategy.

It’s time the federal government got leaner and stopped its credit-card binge. In a responsible government, that wouldn’t inevitably lead to disruption of our airports, borders and ports – no matter what the president says.